Bonner v. Kunzelman

3 Ohio Law. Abs. 87
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 30, 1924
StatusPublished

This text of 3 Ohio Law. Abs. 87 (Bonner v. Kunzelman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bonner v. Kunzelman, 3 Ohio Law. Abs. 87 (Ohio Ct. App. 1924).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Epitomized Opinion

Action in partition between the devisees of Kunzelman, Schreiber filed a cross petition alleging a leasehold which Agatha Kunzelman had renewed Jan. 27, 1922 for a period of three years. Agatha Kunzelman, the lessor, had only a life estate under the will of her husband which provided that she had “full power to sell as she thinks best, mortgage to pay my debts if necessary, and do with as she pleases as long as she remains my widow.”

Upon the authority pf Wolff v. O’Brien (Mass.) 121 N. E. 368, the court held that the widow had full power and authority to make the lease in question.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Wolff v. O'Brien
121 N.E. 368 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 Ohio Law. Abs. 87, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonner-v-kunzelman-ohioctapp-1924.